What was this? Bury yourself in a dress day? Wondering if eva amurri had something done to her face. She used to have much rounder face and her eyes really used to pop out more. Anyone else? I mean she looks fine, but i miss the old face.

At first it seemed like the theme was blue/red.Then the Angie Harmon picture, is she pregnant? If so I don't get those heels.James VDB wife is such a lovely girl, she needs a dress to accentuate her figure. That last dress is a big fat WHY?It's an optical illusion.

Whenever I think of Nia Vardalos I wonder about her relationship with Tom Hanks and his wife. I understand they Executive Produced her movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" and they paid her peanuts. It's one of the highest grossing movies of all time – $369 million world-wide on a budget of $5 million.

Rita Wilson is half Greek.

OK, more details about the profit distribution (from an article about a lawsuit):

"Vardalos' contract stipulates an 8% participation in adjusted gross profits, while the other three plaintiffs [Tom Hanks, Rita Wilson, Gary Goetzman] are owed one-third each of the net balance remaining after backend disbursements, according to the lawsuit, filed Monday."

So is 8% of adjusted gross profits better than or worse than 33-1/3% of "net balance remaining after backend disbursements?"

And roughly how much of the box office gross would be "adjusted gross profits?"

Principessa… With easy math, you are figuring that Nia got about $30mil, while the other three plaintiffs got about $100mil- each. I'd take the $100m, if give a choice but not cry I entered a deal expecting to hopefully get paid and then take home a big fat chunk of change to the tune of tens of millions, because my lil project surpassed everyone's wildest dreams and became one of Higjest grossing in history. Of course, studios have funny math that strips the life out of profits by expensing everything under the sun and more, so who knows the exact dollars. No matter what, though, everyone made BANK.

@PS thanks but I don't think it's that easy. For example, the movie grossed over $300 million worldwide, but that's box office take. From what I've read, the studio gets a big chunk of that upfront with blockbusters, then over time the studio's share decreases and the individual theater owner's share increases. So the part of that $300 million pie that is available to the producers is already "only" about $150 to $200 million. Then you've got production, advertising and distribution costs, and that's probably where a lot of the funny math comes in. Various sites say it cost $5 million to produce, or $23 million (the latter is probably with advertising and distribution costs included).

When the lawsuit was filed in 2007 by Nia Vardalos, Tom Hanks and his wife and one other guy, the defendant responded by saying they had already distributed $44 million to the four of them.

They clearly thought that was too low, and wanted an accounting.

Interestingly, they dropped the lawsuit the next year. Maybe the studio gave them a lump sum buyout, I dunno. But from what I read, they didn't settle, they just dropped it.

The thing is, with the funny math, maybe Nia's 8% of X was better than Tom Hanks's 33-1/3% of Y. I dunno.

But your basic point is well taken – without Hanks and his wife stepping in to vouch for it, it never would have become the blockbuster it was … and even if she only got $10 million that's still $10 million more than she had any hope of before the movie got made!

DISCLAIMER

CRAZY DAYS AND NIGHTS IS A GOSSIP SITE. THE SITE PUBLISHES RUMORS, CONJECTURE, AND FICTION. IN ADDITION TO ACCURATELY REPORTED INFORMATION, CERTAIN SITUATIONS, CHARACTERS AND EVENTS PORTRAYED IN THE BLOG ARE EITHER PRODUCTS OF THE AUTHOR'S IMAGINATION OR ARE USED FICTITIOUSLY. INFORMATION ON THIS SITE MAY CONTAIN ERRORS OR INACCURACIES; THE BLOG'S PROPRIETOR DOES NOT MAKE WARRANTY AS TO THE CORRECTNESS OR RELIABILITY OF THE SITE'S CONTENT. LINKS TO CONTENT ON AND QUOTATION OF MATERIAL FROM OTHER SITES ARE NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CRAZY DAYS AND NIGHTS.